Imagine if a company demanded you install a camera in your bedroom, that you couldn't turn off, cover, or obscure.
You have no access to the feed from the camera, when it's on, or what it captures. You have no control over what happens to the video, who it's shared with, and how it's analyzed. Furthermore, you have to take on pure faith the good intentions of the company.
Do you trust them, would you go ahead with accepting that policy?
Of course not, but many privacy policies are effectively no better, and now imagine it's not your bedroom, it's your child's, and it becomes clear why you need to carefully review privacy policies.
For anyone who thinks your government will protect you, if the company baselessly claims they won't hand out the video, or misuse the contents, that generally satisfies the majority of federal security policy.
If you read that, and still find privacy policy boring, you're not paying attention. The amount of kick back I get to that kind of explanation is actually ridiculous, being in that course, I break down the Monday.com privacy policy, and show how it's so invasive, and violating that Epstein would get a hard on.
On the Monday.com privacy policy, they outright state they'll digitally stock you using third-party cookies, pixels, and any other means they can find to harvest your data. When I pointed that out to the company owner, he sent it to Monday who came back saying it was "impossible, and we don't have time to stalk you.", really? That's what cookies are for, that's what tracking pixels do, that's why you use them. Hence, the camera in the bedroom example, they want a camera in your bedroom, and what do you get from it? A very low-quality software? A terrible task management system? A useless project management platform?
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success. -- Christopher Lascl